JJBA OCT #8 R1M2 Jojolity Deliberations

Judge Sloop (Mario)

Moving to Jojolity, our players were asked to “Grow, adapt, and improve from each race to the next” - both players took on a similar core thesis for this, opting to look at how their characters could iterate and improve on techniques from the early races to do better in the races to follow - a very reasonable approach to take! But the devil is in the details, so let’s look at the specifics.

Starting again with Avery, I can see what you were going for here - the narrative through-line of Avery workshopping his news report is a sensible one, but I feel the execution is muddied a bit when it comes to integration within the strategy. Despite a stated thesis towards the end about how Avery is learning, building on, and iterating upon the techniques they used, I never really got that same sense mechanically - up until the third course, the narrative and mechanics felt like two separate elements, with neither one really informing the other. I did enjoy the Kicker Redux though, that was perfect, no notes. As for the rest though… it’s eminently “fine”, I just wish there had been a more solid integration of the narrative thesis into the meat of the strategy. For that reason, I feel I can’t give this more than a low **6**.

As for Jack, I admit that on my first read I didn’t really notice the Jojolity that much. On second read, however, I found myself surprised by just how much the idea of learning and iterating on earlier efforts permeated this strategy. Every technique evolves and gains new form as the races go on, Jack takes moments to specifically recognize what worked, what didn’t, and why - the whole piece builds on itself, and you can really sense how each part leads into the next. I initially thought I’d be giving this a 7, but a deeper read left me impressed enough to give you an **8** - well done!

Judge Schooner (Rocket)

These kinds of Jojolities are some of my favorites when I am stratting a match, because it so perfectly tees up both mechanical and narrative integration. Especially with the new definitions of robustness and integrality striking the balance between these approaches to jojolity is key to scoring well. Both teams address both, but I think that one side manages to handle the mechanical incorporation better than the other to a meaningful degree.

Avery makes a strong impression with an incredibly charming throughline about both completing the match objective and writing their big new piece. The theming is strong, and the dialogue is incredibly well written, however I think that there is something to be desired in mechanical incorporation. Individual tech evolved over the match, but I do feel like there was room for how Avery sees and engages with their opponent, NPC boats, and their overarching plans beyond individual pieces of tech. Even with that, I feel like your narrative drags you out of the realm of a 6 just up into a low 7/10.

My comments on Jack are like Avery without my criticisms. For how little narrative is in the strat I think that a potent narrative is told, and the majority of that is done in the mechanical text. The way that Jack's thought process as a character is so clear and that is reflected in both the actions that he takes and the way that your writing expresses that it is quite wonderful. The integration of Jack's experiences with his team in the narrative sections to provide context and depth to how Jack's approach to the different legs of the regatta evolves and improves is a welcome cherry on top of your other efforts. This is close to a 9 for me but maybe lacks some of the punchiness or X-factor needed. Even still a high 8/10 feels more than fair here. Excellent work all around!

Judge Dinghy (Stream)

Avery

I like the narrative element of the headlines being iterated on in each part, and I feel like you demonstrated Avery’s growth throughout the match well in that way.

 I felt like there were a lot of good, repeatable techniques throughout but they didn’t really feel iterative on one another in the ways that I think would work well for the spirit of the jojolity until towards the end.

What is there is quite good, but I would’ve liked to have seen more of that solid narrative being woven into the mechanics. I went back and forth on the score a little bit, I think the narrative is present enough throughout the match and it’s incorporated well enough into the final map that I’ll give it a 7, but I think it definitely could have been pushed further.

Jack

I felt you did a good job of iterating on the techniques you introduced in the beginning throughout each race! I feel like it’s a bit lighter on narrative compared to your opponent, but what is there in that regard is good, and I feel like you make up for it well due to your consistent recycling and upgrading of your previously introduced plans, which feels like it aligns quite well with the jojolity. I think it ekes out an 8/10, and could have definitely made it higher with some more spice in the narrative components. Great showing!

---

At the end here, I want to commend both strategies once again for being concise and having very good fundamentals. This being the second “establishing” match of the tournament, especially oriented towards the newcomers, I think both of these strategies demonstrate a great baseline understanding of both the confines of the match, and of the system itself. Kudos to both players and teams for your efforts!